Child Custody: After the Sexual Revolution

By Judith Reisman, 27 April, 2009

Child Custody: After the Sexual Revolution<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
By
Judith Reisman

            After World War II, exhausted Americans succumbed to a costly, criminal sexual revolution just as World War I had primed an exhausted Russian population to submit to a costly, criminal communist revolution.

American children had thrived under the care of parents who, whether eagerly or apathetically, came to the conjugal bed chaste, remaining faithful until death parted them. Sexually libertine societies do not however, maintain such marriages for long. Where pleasure is a prime urge, males slither swiftly into brute mode, followed soon by female wannabes.

            Before the sexual revolution, fornication, and adultery were criminal and protection of children from sexual stimuli an acknowledged American standard. Moms were generally fiscally dependent, so barring unbearable abuse, mothers commonly stayed in their marriages. However, despite who sought a divorce, judges largely ruled that mothers merited both child custody, and alimony. After his birth, Gerald King's biological father became violent. Mrs. King got full custody of the child who became the 38th President of the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />United States, Gerald R. Ford. Despite Mrs. King's re-marriage the boy's grandfather paid child support for 17-years. It was a matter of manly honor..

            The sexual revolution challenged manly honor. It began with Alfred Kinsey's discredited books Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior of the Human Female (1953) followed by Playboy's swift entry into millions of marriage beds. By 1969 "no fault divorce" spun into a divorce deluge. The Pill, abortion on demand, pornography, alcohol, drugs, and the rush into sodomy and prostitution would radically increase marital sexual demands and its fallout into wife battery, child abuse, and even incest.

In the current social collapse the wonder is not that men become uncivil, the wonder is that millions still serve properly as honorable husbands and fathers.

The Ohio Family Court Feasibility Study dates 1959 for a nascent Family Court, and The Historical Society of the Courts of the State of New York, 1969 for Family Court expansions, following a "no fault divorce" flood.[i] This divorce flood appeared to justify shifting wife, and child battery and incest from criminal court to a judge based private, or "family" court.

            Instead of healing and reconciling families, it seemed that family court was creating a child custody crisis. Historically and cross culturally, hostile men are violent unless they are restrained by more powerful males. In his study of the "Fathers' Rights Movement" (2006), Melbourne Law School professor Michael Flood warned men to avoid "fathers' rights networks," that incite "anger, blame, and destructive strategies of litigation" that hurt "themselves and relations with [their] children."[1]

            In The Failure of Family Courts to Protect Children from Abuse in Custody Disputes," Louisiana attorney Richard DuCote argued that some dissolute judges view even proofs of wife battery, pornography use, adultery, and incest as "no fault."
[N]o woman, despite very abundant evidence that her child has been sexually molested by her ex-husband or that she has been repeatedly pummeled by the violent father of her child, can safely walk into any family court in the country and not face a grave risk of losing custody to the abuser.[2]

            Absent a jury in Family Court, battered mothers too often lost child custody once they reported child abuse. Yet, wife batterers are often violent. In 2004 The Sunday Times, UK wrote that vengeful fathers' groups threaten "court staff and family lawyers." One man "handcuffed himself to Margaret Hodge, the children's minister" at a conference. Others "tied up an employee who suffered from a heart condition."
            One judge who condemned the violence "received all sorts ofthreatsHis office was invaded by 10 protesters in decontamination suits." Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, of the UK High Court said these men throw "condoms with purple powder and [parked] a double-decker bus outside my house."[3]

            Elizabeth Richards of the National Alliance for Family Court Justice claims to represent about 1800 mothers who lost custody to violent fathers, charging these "bullies" receive millions by "officials at the Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children & Families." Richards defends most divorced dads: "While few try to harm their ex-wives, 70% of angry men who litigate gain sole custody."[4]

               The Father's network (Children's Rights Council, American Coalition for Fathers and Children, and National Congress for Fathers & Children[5]) reports $7,625 million in government funds for "salaries, office rent, and other expenses" to enforce "visitation rights." [6] While there are certainly abuses by mothers, says Richards, courts seldom cancel visitation unless a man is a violent and/or sexual threat."

            This seemingly irate faction has used "experts" like Drs. Richard Gardner, Ralph Underwager, and Warren Farrell, all three pedophile and incest advocates. Kinsey disciple Gardner said incest was an unsexy mom's fault, Underwager praised pedophiles in the Dutch Paidika, Journal of Paedophila, and Farrell touted "Incest .The Last Taboo," in Penthouse December 1977.

            Gardner, (deceased) created the "Parental Alienation Syndrome," rejected by the Family Research Council along with the National Organization of Women, the American Psychiatric Association, the National Association for the Prosecution of Child Abuse, and the American Judges Association. Unfortunately the PAS claim that mothers who report incest are frigid and jealous is still cited by courts and social services in granting child custody to certified abusers.

            Such child custody horrors reflect a sexually libertine society. The continued collapse of chastity and monogamy dictates the growth of a sexually virulent society that exploits children and women absent the fear of morally empowered male protectors. For societal evil to flourish and prosper, males, especially brave, morally honorable fathers, are the first line of attack.

            Male and female judges who award children to sexually abusive parents are complicit in abuse, in effect trafficking in children. Unless and until the public learns how and why we were lied to by our sexual revolutionaries, we will continue to lose our marriages; fathers will continue to be made impotent by sexual deviance, mothers will continue to seek to be sexy instead of sagacious, and we will continue to lose the civil society that formally offered children largely free, and even safe and happy lives.

1005 words